McCain's VP: Gov. Palin is chosen

[VariableFeedback]

Originally Posted by FNG19

SAME HERE. I would rather we had a 99% voter turnout and inaugurate Obama than to have a 19% turnout and inaugurate McCain. I know who I'm voting for. I've not disguised this fact. But, before I'm Red-vs-Blue, I'm Red-White-And-Blue. We The People participating in the process is exponentially more important to me because, in the long run, that's what's going to fix this country.

I disagree. If only 19% of the population knows enough to make an informed choice this November, so be it. I have no problem if 80% are uninformed and choose to stay at home. Low turnout can be an indication of multiple things, such as apathy or disgust with the candidates, but it can also be a sign of contentment with the current situation.

[RugerNiner]

[str8shooter]

Originally Posted by VariableFeedback

I disagree. If only 19% of the population knows enough to make an informed choice this November, so be it. I have no problem if 80% are uninformed and choose to stay at home. Low turnout can be an indication of multiple things, such as apathy or disgust with the candidates, but it can also be a sign of contentment with the current situation.

Bold is mine

I don't know that it would be a perfect world if those those who were uninformed or apethetic didn't vote, but that's precisely why the founding fathers came up with the electoral college. They didn't think "we, the people" were smart enough to be entrusted with really deciding who the president should be, so they came up with a system to make us feel like we're making the selection, but in reality, all we're doing is telling the delegates know how we feel, but they're under no obligation to listen.

For 48 states, it's winner take all, so regardless of the popular vote, the candidate with the most delegates voting their way takes all the state's electoral votes, and the people that voted another way are virtually told to f'off, your vote didn't count. In a State like California with 55 electoral votes, a candidate could (theoretically) win the popular vote by a land slide, but if another candidate gets the most votes from the electoral college, that candidate is 20% closer to the white house. If Ron Paul were to win a couple states like PA, TX and/or Ohio, and neither McCain nor Obama get the required 270 electoral votes, then the system would tell all of us to f'off and the House of Reps would choose the president. Assuming the VP electoral votes coincide with the President's, the Senate would choose the VP. Even if McCain got 20 million more votes from citizens and 20 more delegate votes than Obama, if he only had 269 delegates, it wouldn't win him the presidency.

Election day just gives us the opportunity to express our opinion, but our vote means diddly. If it did, George W. never would have won the first election.

[adymond]

Originally Posted by RugerNiner

I'll say it then. Respectfully


I'd hit it.

Originally Posted by J8300

Yes most of them will vote for someone based solely on the letter next to their name.

And enough with the two articles about a probe. Let's count up all the probes that ANY politician has had directed at them. She is tough on corruption. Do you really think that a corrupt group could not conspire to present testimony that might just open an investigation? There are two links provided (and for some reason had to be provided a second time) that state anything negative. All other material I have seen about this woman is possitive. Not one person in this thread or any other thread has stated they would vote based upon what letter was beside a name. If you are truly that damn dense to think we are or are suggesting we are shove off and go troll somewhere else. People have time and time again discussed this and given their opinions. You are entitled to yours, but don't presume to know why we make ours. Many have spelled it out and you are either just too focused on your agenda to read and understand rational thought or you just don't care. There are plenty of folks who are going to vote third party and that's fine. They will discuss the merits, but I haven't seen anyone else bashing the rest of us who are trying to make a decision we feel will be best for our country.

[phill]

Thank God a breath of fresh air. Experience(?) at least not bought and paid for by one of the most corrupt political machines ever. Look at the Cook County-Chicago Dem. party and see if you want them along with dick durbin running your country. We have a gov. picked by these clowns and the state is headed for a train wreck.

[Pector55]

This may make some of you with more Libertarian views happy about Palin. In February, she spoke to MTV about the Republican candidates...

In this interview, Palin calls controversial Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul “cool.” “He’s a good guy,” she added. “He’s so independent. He’s independent of the party machine. I’m like, ‘Right on, so am I.’ ”

She also spoke about feeling allegiance with former presidential hopeful Mitt Romney. “He said all the right things about resource development in Alaska,” she said. “I didn’t have an opportunity to speak to all the candidates, but again, it’s not my job to speak to all the candidates and tell Americans who to vote for. That’s Americans’ jobs, to figure out what candidates are standing for. That’s the voters’ jobs.”

[NineseveN]

Originally Posted by Pector55

This may make some of you with more Libertarian views happy about Palin. In February, she spoke to MTV about the Republican candidates...

In this interview, Palin calls controversial Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul “cool.” “He’s a good guy,” she added. “He’s so independent. He’s independent of the party machine. I’m like, ‘Right on, so am I.’ ”

She also spoke about feeling allegiance with former presidential hopeful Mitt Romney. “He said all the right things about resource development in Alaska,” she said. “I didn’t have an opportunity to speak to all the candidates, but again, it’s not my job to speak to all the candidates and tell Americans who to vote for. That’s Americans’ jobs, to figure out what candidates are standing for. That’s the voters’ jobs.”

http://newsroom.mtv.com/2008/08/29/s...mtv-interview/

[J8300]

[quote=adymond;408305]I'll say it then. Respectfully


I'd hit it.

And enough with the two articles about a probe. Let's count up all the probes that ANY politician has had directed at them.

Why would we count those up, they arent relevant to her.

She is tough on corruption.

I keep reading that, but I never see any examples.

Do you really think that a corrupt group could not conspire to present testimony that might just open an investigation?

Oooh a conspiracy theory.

There are two links provided (and for some reason had to be provided a second time) that state anything negative.

The second time was for someone who apparently missed them the first time judging by a statement he made. I thought it was quite obvious as to the reason.

All other material I have seen about this woman is possitive.

Like I said earlier in this thread we must be reading different sources. She wants creationism taught in schools because "evolution is just a theory." Creationism isnt a theory or even a valid hypothesis. This alone should bar her from running for any office. This news isnt positive in my eyes. She is also pro-life. Again not positive to me as it threatens Roe v Wade. Not to mention most pro-lifers are pro death penalty and I hate hypocrisy.

Not one person in this thread or any other thread has stated they would vote based upon what letter was beside a name.

No one has to state it. There are other ways to figure out what people will do. People can imply things. They can say things with context.

Hell they can even say (and DID) "its not just about the candidate" implying a party line vote.

If you are truly that damn dense to think we are or are suggesting we are shove off and go troll somewhere else. People have time and time again discussed this and given their opinions. You are entitled to yours, but don't presume to know why we make ours.

Should I go troll somewhere else or am I entitled to my opinion?

My opinion is that most of the members here, and in the country vote along party lines. Or is that fact? Probably both.

Many have spelled it out and you are either just too focused on your agenda to read and understand rational thought or you just don't care.

What agenda would that be? Is this part of the conspiracy you spoke of? Or are you just presuming to know why I'm doing something when I havent stated any reason? Do as you say not as you do?

There are plenty of folks who are going to vote third party and that's fine.

That is fine. I know there are lots of independent thinkers on this board, but they arent a majority.

They will discuss the merits, but I haven't seen anyone else bashing the rest of us who are trying to make a decision we feel will be best for our country.

Where did I bash anyone? I made a general statement that happens to be true. Look at any exit poll.

[J8300]

In this interview, Palin calls controversial Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul “cool.” “He’s a good guy,” she added. “He’s so independent. He’s independent of the party machine. I’m like, ‘Right on, so am I.’ ”

She sounds really intelligent.

[str8shooter]

Originally Posted by str8shooter

C'mon Lycan, 90 posts and you haven't said it yet!.
.
.
.
.
.
C'mon, say it..... say it...... say it, damn it!
.

FINALLY!

Lycanmodsmusttrytomaintainsomedignitythrope, you let me down, man.